Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers_fan
Well I'd prefer a defence attorney take the moral high road and not bring up allegations of molestation. That's pretty serious stuff, I'm not sure anyone innocent would like that attached to their character. If it's true, then fine. But I don't know that they brought any evidence in. If they did, I'll take my comment back. I just think it's pretty bad if someone has to falsely ruin the credibility of someone in order to try and get their client off.
And it's not as if this is a spic and span lawyer anyways.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/casey-antho...ry?id=13784113 |
So what if the guy has his own issues? He's diligently representing his client, and to you that's grounds to call him a disgusting human being. That's pathetic.
And again, just so it's clear. Taking the "moral high road" means not presenting potential mitigating evidence, which means a much greater chance of a succesful appeal. That would be a great result for everyone wouldn't it?